I was just listening to Ashkenazy's recording of these the other day and wondering why I didn't totally love it, as I usually do with his Rachmaninov. Now I can make a comparison. For instance, he takes #4 noticeably slower and hits more of the notes, but it sounds cautious compared to your more lively version. And I usually like his tone, but his #6 is thick and heavy in a way that's harder to follow than yours.

Speaking of tone, from time to time yours sounds golden, almost like Rachmaninov himself.

I was just listening to Ashkenazy's recording of these the other day and wondering why I didn't totally love it, as I usually do with his Rachmaninov. Now I can make a comparison. For instance, he takes #4 noticeably slower and hits more of the notes, but it sounds cautious compared to your more lively version. And I usually like his tone, but his #6 is thick and heavy in a way that's harder to follow than yours.

Speaking of tone, from time to time yours sounds golden, almost like Rachmaninov himself.

I agree with schmonz. Note perfection does not necessarily make the performance. The mood was captured perfectly. Ashkenazy is Ashkenazy and Rachmaninov is Rachmaninov, all pianists have their strengths and weaknesses. One of Askenazys weaknesses, IMO, was his often harsh tone. You, Mr. Sertrakian do no have that problem.

I don't care about note perfection or lack thereof. All I care about is the sound. Does it sound as the composer intended? Does it convey the mood? Does it move me as a listener? To those last three questions I can answer, as to your performances, YES!

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum